[rfc-i] Referencing Internet Drafts

Andrew Sullivan ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
Thu May 28 15:52:34 PDT 2015

Normally, I think of "document series" as having an implied modifier, "archival".   But you're strictly right, I suppose. 

Andrew Sullivan 
Please excuse my clumbsy thums. 

> On May 28, 2015, at 16:52, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke at gmx.de> wrote:
>> On 2015-05-28 20:54, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 02:08:43PM -0400, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote:
>>> As far as I recollect, we didn't use "Internet Draft" in the
>>> reference, so this isn't a change.
>> Also, since they're supposed to be at least in theory temporary
>> documents that don't persist, they can't actually be thought of as a
>> document series.
> I don't see how "being in a document series" implies persistence. That being said, Internet Drafts are de facto persistent now (data tracker).
> Best regards, Julian

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list